Whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires district courts to grant plaintiffs represented by counsel leave to amend their complaint sua sponte after granting a motion to dismiss

QUESTION PRESENTED When Liberty Mutual moved to dismiss Ethan Volungis’s complaint alleging bad-faith handling of an insurance claim, Volungis and his counsel chose not to amend the complaint as a matter of right. When Volungis and his counsel then responded to the motion to dismiss, they did not request leave to file an amended complaint in the event the court dismissed the complaint. After the district court granted Liberty Mutual’s motion to dismiss, Volungis and his counsel again chose not to move to amend the complaint. Nevertheless, in affirming the dismissal of Volungis’s complaint, the Ninth Circuit held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) required the district court sua sponte to grant the leave to amend that Volungis and his counsel had repeatedly elected not to seek. The question presented is whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) requires district courts to grant plaintiffs represented by counsel leave to amend their complaint sua sponte after granting a motion to dismiss, or whether—as every other regional circuit has held—district courts have discretion not to grant leave to amend when plaintiffs represented by counsel do not ask for it.